U.S. v. Murgas

Full title: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. LUIS A. MURGAS, a/k/a Big Louie, a/k/a…

Court: United States District Court, N.D. New York

Date published: Sep 22, 2003

95-CR-384(HGM) (N.D.N.Y. Sep. 22, 2003)

Opinion

95-CR-384(HGM)

September 22, 2003

HON. GLENN T. SUDDABY, United States Attorney, Syracuse, New York

EDWARD ZAS, ESQ., The Legal Aid Society, Federal Defender Division, New York, New YorK, for Defendant Luis E. Cordoba-Murgas

WILLIAM M. BORRILL, ESQ., Office of Corporation Counsel, Utica, NY, for Defendant Luis Antonio Todd-Murgas

ROBERT G. WELLS, ESQ., Syracuse, New York for Defendant Raul Antonio Cordoba-Murgas

GRANT JAQUITH, ESQ., Assistant United States Attorney

LINDA M. CAMPBELL, ESQ., Syracuse, New York

ORDER

HOWARD MUNSON, Senior District Judge

Pursuant to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals' decision inUnited States v. Cordoba-Murgas, 233 F.3d 704, (2d Cir. 2000), the court reopens sentencing. The parties agree that the Second Circuit's remand was limited in its scope. As prescribed by the Second Circuit's mandate, at sentencing, the court is to "apply the preponderance [of the evidence] standard to determine whether the adjustment specified in U.S.S.G. § 2Dl.l(d)(1) (for Raul Cordoba) and the departure specified in § 5K2.1 (for Luis Cordoba and Luis Todd, and, in the alternative, for Raul Cordoba) are applicable." Id. at 710. Therefore, with respect to Raul Cordoba and the applicability of U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1 (d)(1), the court's task is to determine whether "a victim was killed under circumstances that would constitute murder under 18 U.S.C. § 1111" under the preponderance of the evidence standard. Id. at 709. With respect to Luis Cordoba and Luis Todd and the applicability of U.S.S.G. § 5K2.1, the court's task is to determine "whether death resulted" under the preponderance of the evidence standard. Id. at 710.

In order to make these determinations, the court will reconsider the record now before it under the preponderance of the evidence standard. The court, however, will also receive the statement made by "CW1" previously submitted by the government, and, at a sentencing hearing, the court will permit the government to call Natalie Todd and "CW2" as witnesses. See Government's Letter to the Court April 14, 2003. In addition, at the sentencing hearing, the court will permit defendants to present new evidence that is relevant to the court's above-described tasks. The parties are directed to contact the court immediately to schedule a conference at which time the court will discuss those issues raised by defendants in their letter of June 18, 2003, including substitution of counsel, any discovery matters, and the scheduling of the sentencing hearing and sentencing.

IT IS SO ORDERED.